Linux-Advocacy Digest #703, Volume #29 Tue, 17 Oct 00 08:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Weevil")
Re: Astroturfing (Ben Bos)
Re: Astroturfing (Ben Bos)
Re: Astroturfing (Ben Bos)
Re: Astroturfing (Ben Bos)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (mlw)
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux (Chris Sherlock)
Re: I think Loki really screwed the guy (Chris Sherlock)
Re: Anybody want to test a widget? (Chris Sherlock)
Re: Why does Linux have to be such a pain to install? - A speech
Re: Linux Sucks
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Chris Sherlock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 05:09:15 -0500
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Think about it. It's much more likely that MS competitors pay people to
post
> > anti-ms FUD on usenet. Do you get paid per post?
>
> I don't. But it's posts like Weevil's and Devlins's that make me post.
If
> they'd shut up I would too. I wouldn't mind being paid for what I do here
> because it's honest work. Linux folks lie about Windows and Mac folks lie
about
> Windows every day. We tell the truth. Keep it up man! I will try to.
>
One would think you'd "shut up" out of sheer embarassment.
You know, you and others are constantly asking myself or others to "Post
proof!" I have posted proof of whatever I was saying countless times now,
and I've never once asked somebody else to post proof.
What you do here is honest work, huh? And Linux folks lie about Windows?
Mac folks do, too? But you and Drestin and your buddies tell the truth?
Well, I guess you've caught us. In the face of that brilliant argument
we'll have to come clean. Yes, it's true. Amigas never really existed. We
faked up the history just because we hate MS.
Companies *begged* MS to charge them 350% more for DOS. They lined up for
it.
MS *never* put any kind of code in Windows to detect for DR DOS and display
bogus error messages. We faked the whole court case, and you caught us at
it! Brilliant!
I could go on, but I just don't have the strength. All those links
everybody has been posting are really on a single, secret, anti-Microsoft
web site that we've worked for years on (using Microsoft tools, of course).
There was never really a Caldera court case. There isn't even a Caldera.
Whew! I'm so glad it's all over. It feels so good to come clean!
You should try it.
jwb
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Bos)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: 17 Oct 2000 21:32:42 +1100
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 03:02:43 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> What's a skatepunk?
>
>An anti-establishment liberal who listens to punk rock music and usually
>passes the time skating rather than working.
>
>If they do use computers, they most likely use Linux as the OS if, for
>no other reason, to be anti-establishment to MS (as if MS is an
>establishment).
>
>In fact, you'll find that most Linux advocates seem to hate MS for
>no good reason and fail to back up any claims they make because they
>read them from other skatepunk-like advocacy sites that bash MS
>and Windows without any credible evidence.
>
>A skatepunk is not necessarily a Linux advocate, nor is a Linux
>advocate a skatepunk, but they are very, very alike in more ways
>than one.
>
>-Chad
>>
>> On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 17:51:51 GMT, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >> And over reefer smoking linux skatepunks like you :-)
>> >
>> >skatepunks?........HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!.....AAAaaaaa......good one!......and
>> >you are?......57?
>> >>
>> >
>>
>
>
Some UNIX advocates use UNIX because it performs the tasks that NT-based
applications cannot handle, for extended periods of time. Without fail. No
use bitching about an operating system when it does the job for some. Use what
you need.
Cheers,
Ben
--
Ben Bos
ICQ: 4285483
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Bos)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: 17 Oct 2000 21:40:21 +1100
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 03:00:15 GMT, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8amG5.9426$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
><SNIP: other claiming Win2K is great>
>
>> If it were true that win2k integrated with standards you would not
>> have any problems using it as a client to standard LDAP
>
>Please cite specific, documented examples. Until then, I'll consider
>this an unknowledgable contrived statement.
>
>> and kerberos servers and you would lose no functionality compared
>> to having to run an active directory server.
>
>What functionality would you lose? Specifically?
>
>Here they are:
>a.) Group policy
>b.) Down-level NT authentication tokens
>c.) Group Membership
>
>Of these, which other OS or Kerberos server supports? You can use
Novell's NDS and any X.500 directory (under which LDAP). And still, your
listing is _really_ limited.
>Win2K as a client to any other Kerberos server, but you can't take
>advantage of these features. Why not? Because they're Win2k -> Win2K
>specific. This would not benefit anyone in a Unix <-> Win2K situation,
>so your point is irrelevant.
>
>By the way, Win2K's implementation of Kerberos krbv5 is fully compliant.
>Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
>
>> I don't think that is true at all. In fact I think it is like most
>> other Microsoft products that claim standards compliance yet really
>> refuse to interoperate with other vendors' products.
>
>More contrived statments.
>
>
>-Chad
>
>
Anyway, I have not seen Win2K live yet. I hear that Active Directory
disappoints.
Cheers,
Ben
--
Ben Bos
ICQ: 4285483
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Bos)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: 17 Oct 2000 21:48:41 +1100
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 03:03:55 GMT, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8sd786$1ur$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <39e7dc20$0$42761$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > > > What's wrong with Windows 2000?
>> > >
>> > > Stabilty.
>> >
>> > There are no issues of stability with W2K. None. W2k is every bit as
>> stable
>> > as any other OS.
>>
>>
>> ROFLOL!! In your wet dreams.
>
>Typical Linvocate reply. No substantiation, no reply, no claims, no
>nothing, just pure, unadulterated BS.
>
>This guy wouldn't know stability if it bit him in the ass.
>
Well, it has not been out for all that long. You really cannot judge the
stability of a product unless you have used it in a production environment
for extended periods of time.
>"No really, X crashing 6 times a day for no reason is still better
>than M$!" or something similar.
If X Windows crashes six times a day, then there must be something seriously
wrong. It never crashed on me. Then again, I do not use it all that much,
either.
>
>-Chad
>
>
Cheers,
Ben
--
Ben Bos
ICQ: 4285483
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ben Bos)
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: 17 Oct 2000 22:02:05 +1100
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 23:06:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 17:54:25 +0500, "ostracus"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>[follow the logic]
>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>> Take a look at trade rag articles from a year ago say summer of 1999 and
>>> take a look now.
>>>
>>> Linux was on the cover of Infoworld constantly.
>>>
>>> Notice a large decrease in the number of Linux articles?
>>>
>>> Last year Linux was the "babe of the press" and it was everywhere on
>>> television in mainstream press and so forth.
>>>
>>> See much of that lately?
>>
>>1. Something needs to be advertised heavily, correct?
>
>You Linonuts were sure as hell whining about it over and over again.
>Every Linux sighting seemed to deserve a party.
>
>>
>>> See Linux companies having financial trouble?
>>
>>2. Something has to be doing well in the "making money" department,
>>correct?
>
>If you ever want to see it (the product) see the light of day yes.
>
>
>
>>
>>> Linux has peaked and is on the way down.
>>
>>So your definition of success is that 1 and 2 are true, correct?
>
>Yep. And Linux fails on both counts.
>
>>So then the indicators of this would be number of users stagnating or
>>lowering. Because of such then companies would either be pulling out of
>>the market, or not entering it, correct so far?
>
>
>Linux is dying on the desktop. It never even got started. It is a has
>been before it even has been a babe.
>
>>So do you know if the above is happening? Care to give examples?
>>
>>I await your answer.
>
>Ask 1000 people at random on the corner of Wall Street and Broadway
>what they are running on their desktops and see what they say.
>
>A major University in NYC actually did a similar study and the results
>were less than overwhelming for Linux. In fact quite a number of re
>spondee's wrote in on the ballet "What is Linux"?
>
>I think that says it all.
>
>You think you are going to sell Linux to Pig Farmers in South Dakota?
>
>claire
>
>
Strange. Linux has been provoking comments like these since 1993, at least.
There definitely is a place for a cheap UNIX-like operating system that runs on
cheap hardware.
--
Ben Bos
ICQ: 4285483
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 07:15:27 -0400
jazz wrote:
>
> I really need a powerful word processor with templates, styles, etc.
>
> What is available for Linux? How about for Powerpoint and Excel?
>
> Thanks ---
> Jazz
You can download Star Office. I used to use Applix, but I got their last
version and it wasn't as good as their previous version. SO 5.2, OTOH is
as good as MS office in that it doesn't crash like MS office, and it
does not take down the OS like MS office.
It has no problems reading MS office files, at least as far as I've
seen.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:17:04 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Deja has been around for *ages*. It's just they haven't put up the older
archives.
Chris
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8sdhfu$9gc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > It's not a god thing it's just that eric has been sent to the usenet
> > many times and he still can not find information. I found at least 6
> > posts that had the information he wanted by doing a deja search (all
> > news groups) looking for "linux masq firewall ipchains". After all the
> > BS claims of technical know how eric can not even do a news group
> > search. It would have taken him all of 15 minutes at most. Pathetic
> > really and even more pathetic that you support him.
>
> I first set up my firewall on Linux 2 years ago. I doubt a deja search
> today would reveal what the usenet looked like 2 years ago, since Deja seems
> to only go back a year.
>
> I setup another firewall about a year ago with RedHat 6.1, and haven't done
> so since.
>
> > I mean take a look at how many posts he has made on use net and then try
> > to tell me he is not experiance enough to do a usenet search
>
> That's completely irrelevant to what happened 1-2 years ago.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:26:05 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I think Loki really screwed the guy
This may be true, but try to remember that this is only one company.
Plenty of other companies do *not* do things like this. For instance:
EverythingLinux.com.au have always been very prompt at getting me my
software (except my Debian software and I received a prompt reply about
this one). ThinkGeek sent off my order very promptly as well.
Copyleft.net was also very prompt at sending me my Tux T-Shirt :)
Ok, so I'm a geek!
In any field or marketplace you will find companies selling things and
not being prompt. I don't like it, and I rail against such companies
(for instance the guys that make LinuxCAD - reading about there dealings
makes me shudder), but they do appear when things become popular.
Chris
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Problem is Linux people are so used to giving software away that they
> haven't fine tuned the distribution process and tracking systems
> needed for commercial, pay, software :)
>
> ******DUCK**************
>
> claire.
>
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 01:15:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I don't think what you wrote is right. I went to the site and read the
> >article and comments from the link and it looks like a well reasoned, if
> >somewhat angry, article. Here's what I learned:
> >
> > Some guy bought several games in one order from Loki. One of those
> >games was a pre-release. Because of this they held up his order for all
> >the other products until the pre-release shipped. He complained on their
> >news server and canceled the order. A Loki rep promised the issue would
> >be solved in a reply on that thread. He ordered again, breaking it up
> >into two orders with one containing two pre-release titles, and the
> >other a bunch of other games. One of the two pre-release titles got
> >held up because the other title hadn't been released and he was stuck in
> >the same mess as before. He even offered to pay the extra shipping
> >charges.
> >
> > At this point there were some emails which were posted in comments
> >between him and Loki, where instead of offering him the product he
> >ordered they offered some subscription service. He got pissed and told
> >them to bugger off. A month after that he posted this rant.
> >
> > I think the most damaging thing against Loki in the whole discussion
> >was some Loki representative basically calling him a liar, and then not
> >backing their claim up. This is what those posted emails were about.
> >Most companies would find a way to solve the problem and fend off a PR
> >nightmare rather than piss off a customer. But to call the guy a liar in
> >public rather than dealing with it directly? This looks very weird and
> >damaging to Lokis credibility. The whole thing is just stupid on their
> >part. Some of this is probably miscommunication, but some of it also
> >looks plain wrong on Loki's part.
> >
> > I don't play games in Linux, but I use it and like it. I'll think
> >twice about Loki... not so much because of this story, but because of
> >that Loki person wrote and other comments below. If any company held up
> >an order like this to me I'd tell them to go screw too. Linux is all
> >nice and good, but I don't deal with businesses that treat me don't
> >deliver product and don't provide customer service. Linux supporters or
> >not.
> >
> >Also, the guy knows how to write. He really slammed Loki hard, and
> >apparantly with hard facts.
> >
> >Douglas Browne
> >
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > David M. Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> > Check out this kuro5hin article on Loki... either this guy got
> >burned or
> >> > he's got a major bug up his *ahem*...
> >>
> >> I think his *ahem* is indeed, rather clogged with a major bug. Sounds
> >like
> >> something got screwed up with a distributor that Loki was working
> >with, and
> >> it was more their fault than Loki's... maybe I'm reading wrong, who
> >knows.
> >> Needless to say, I can almost guarantee that if I ordered every game
> >that a
> >> company sells, I'd feel great if I only had problems with one or two
> >and if
> >> it were a distributors mistake, and not the company itself. Also
> >sounds
> >> like this guy's being a dumbass, and should have had the patience to
> >wait
> >> the extra what, 2 days? Obviously if the problem is that his preorder
> >was
> >> not going to be delivered until after the release, he should have
> >waited
> >> until it was released (especially after they told him so...) *shrug*
> >Oh
> >> well.
> >>
> >> D. Butler
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> >Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:28:24 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anybody want to test a widget?
Yeah, why not? email it to me. I still have to install Debian (I'm
getting it soon!) but as soon as I do, I will have a look.
Chris
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In article <8s57k5$3rd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I coded a GTK+ help browser widget last night. It's not full-featured
> > yet and it hasn't been proven to work on any machine but mine, but if
> > you've got nothing to do and a recent distro of Gnome on your machine,
> > maybe you'd like to help out? It's tarballed and gzipped and takes up
> > about 6.3 KB...
>
> Update: takes up 9K now.
>
> So far, one satisfied customer and counting. Any more takers?
>
> wrinkledshirt(at)hotmail(dot)com
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Why does Linux have to be such a pain to install? - A speech
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:18:17 -0400
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 03:39:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've been reading all these messages around the internet about how
>easily people have been setting up their Linux distributions. I'm here
>to tell you that it is in fact, not easy at all to setup a Linux
>distribution onto an older machine. I'm a software developer in real
>life, and have been pushing my company to support more and more open
>source solutions. I don't know why I've been doing this now, because I
>have tried over the last two months to get my RedHat 6.2 distribution
>setup on my older Compaq 133mHz machine. It took me several tries to
>get it running, and a little personal help from a linux guru. After
>that, I could never get the damn thing to talk to the internet. Why?
>I don't know why, I have a 3C509B-TPO card, I guess I have to do more
>than disable the PNP etc, blah, blah, blah. I have a Linksys firewall
>in which it can talk to, but it refuses. I'm wondering why I don't
>just set up another windows os on that machine. It's easy, and it
>works. But, I HATE WINDOWS!! I own RedHat stock, I'm pushing for open
>source solutions, but admit it!!! Linux is NOT ready for primetime as
>far as a personal computer, desktop solution. Save the figures about
>Apache on the web, and SendMail, I'm talking about a home computer
>desktop solution!!
Jay,
I feel your pain...Comcrap is sometimes rather problematic.
I've had great success with Slackware 7.1 on several Compaq machines,
including a Deskpro 6000/5133, Deskpro 6000/P2-266 and others. Also
on my IBM Thinkpad 600. All drivers and such were in the distro and
the Ethernet cards were autodetected and worked promptly with DHCP.
I can't speak for your firewall...my experiences with that stuff is
either via proxy servers in a web browser or dial up directly to my ISP.
As for the ol' desktop stuff, I use Linux on the desktop every day,
both at home and at work. I do web, mail, news, word processing, games...
all the groovy stuff. Plus hacking with Perl and other goodness.
Supporting a group of scientists, many whom have VNC installed on their
NT workstations...I can attach to them across the network and help
them without getting off my lazy butt. <grin>
Good luck to you!
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
Marc Richter - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - kill nospam to mail
==================================================
88. If a group of henchmen fail miserably at a task, I will not berate them
for incompetence then send the same group out to try the task again.
from "Top 100 Things to Do if I Ever Become an Evil Overlord"
The contents of this message express only the sender's opinion.
This message does not necessarily reflect the policy or views of
my employer, Merck & Co., Inc. All responsibility for the statements
made in this Usenet posting resides solely and completely with the
sender.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 20:50:27 -0400
On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:52:55 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If you knew anything about Linsux, you would know that offline news
>reading is about as scarce as a do-do bird.
>
Not for me.
>Of course you can use nightmares like Leafnode and Slrnpull to do the
>job, but PAN traps on me daily.
>
Errr...nightmare?
Leafnode is set up on my laptop to pull down the news at 7 am, although
I can do it manually whenever I want to refresh during the day.
I leave work and can read and post "off the grid" whenever I want.
This took about 15 minutes to setup using cron.
>Agent is probobly the number one newsreader on the net.
Well, YMMV, but Agent has done nothing for me when I've tried it. I have
not been able to figure out how to set it up to allow me to read without
touching the mouse. (ideally by just hitting the space bar)
MT-Newsreader on the Mac, as far as I'm concerned, still blows away every
news reader I've ever used. But slrn under Linux is just dandy for me.
>
>Linux has nothing like it, although maybe in 2 years or so Pan may
>come close.
>
The thing that you seem to not be getting, Claire/Steve/S/whomever, is that
Linux is a toolbox. You get to fit pieces together to do clever things.
For instance, today I set up a rotating sig file for my email.
Cron uses a clever Perl script that I downloaded from freshmeat to slap
a header, a footer and a random quote from the "Top 100 Things I'd Do
If I Became An Evil Overlord" list into a yummy sig...it changes
every 30 minutes. Amuses people at work so far, anyway. Was it a single
utility that I could download and use, possibily being nagged until I sent
the dude $5 to register it? Nah, it was a creation put together with
several small powerful tools.
That's a key difference between the Linux world and the Windows world.
I support a research department of 150 users...they use NT 4.0 as their
primary desktop OS, along with Mac OS for some type of work and a smattering
of other machines (including a few Linux boxen). Anyway, the monolithic
applications in Windows are okay for what they do. And they have their place.
Heck, I have a Windows box in the house just for playing Diablo 2 and
Baldur's Gate. <grin> But in some cases, the big Microsoft stuff isn't what
we need. For instance, I have one Linux machine set up as an Apache web
server running a web-based scheduling package for lab equipment. The lab
machines that people access this from cannot realistically be set up
with Exchange client and the profiles needed to give decent access to
a global Schedule + schedule. In this case, the web based roll-yer-own
solution was better and easier to implement.
>claire
>
>On 16 Oct 2000 00:02:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>> I have never said anything against the stability of Linux. Only times
>>> it crashed on me was running Agent under Wine,
>>
>>And right here is where we see the exact amount of value of "claire"'s
>>opinions about linux.
>>
Claire's opinions are her right to have...it just seems half-assed to run
Linux to run Wine to run Agent. (yes I have Wine on this box. I also have
DOSEmu...comes in handy running some REAL OLD stuff)
Claire should realize that Linux may not be for her. But I've got two options
coming up for my mother in law, who wants to be on the net:
1. Give her my old Macintosh Performa 5215
2. Build her a "grandma friendly" Linux box for dedicated home net use
I'm going to try going the Mac route, but if she pooches it, I'll do
a locked-down Linux install on some extra Intel hardware. Windows,
as far as I'm concerned, is too flacky to inflict upon her (and upon
me, by definition. And I'm not gonna pirate NT or 2000 just so she
won't crash!)
>>
>>
>>
>>-----.
>
--
Marc Richter
==================================================
57. Before employing any captured artifacts or machinery, I will carefully
read the owner's manual.
from "Top 100 Things to Do if I Ever Become an Evil Overlord"
The contents of this message express only the sender's opinion.
This message does not necessarily reflect the policy or views of
my employer, Merck & Co., Inc. All responsibility for the statements
made in this Usenet posting resides solely and completely with the
sender.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 22:37:16 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Ironically, it is *you* who emphasised that you are talking about the
desktop and so you are now attempting to change the subject. I'll let
this pass, however.
"They" in this article referred to ONE Compaq product manager who gave
NO reasons for *why* Oracle was so terrible under Linux.
Chris
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> They also mentioned how much Oracle sucked under Linux which backs up
> my point that Linux versions of Windows applications are somewhat
> lacking.
>
> claire
>
> On Thu, 12 Oct 2000 23:27:49 +1000, Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Didn't you read the Compaq snippet you posted, Steve?
> >
> >The spokesperson was complaining about Linux not being ready for
> >the enterprise server space yet - 2.2 kernel SMP scalability,
> >Oracle version (but 8i on Linux looks very much like 8i on Solaris
> >looks like 8i on HP-UX looks like 8i on DG-UX looks like....).
> >
> >This is the area where Starfire and VAX clusters typically rule.
> >
> >There was no mention of the desktop at all.
> >The geek reference was a geek == hobbyist thing.
> >
> >
> >The complaint was purely one of scalability!
> >'Linux is not very useful beyond simple Web, mail, and DNS
> >services on small Intel-based servers, she says. Linux is "not for
> >database servers or online transaction processing. The independent
> >software vendor support [is not there]: Oracle has to do the next
> >version of its database [for Linux] because the current one is
> >horrible."'
> >I think the main Oracle complaint is actually about the toolset.
> >Linux seems to be a tier-3 platform for Oracle's tools. Win32 is
> >level 1, the ,ajor Unix platforms are level 2, the amaller
> >players are level 3.
> >
> >...and I wouldn't replace my Starfire with a Beowulf cluster yet
> >either. It may not be that far off, though. It would need a fairly
> >major rework to gain the benefits of the parallelism.
> >I think we'd leave the Oracle database on the Starfire though.
> >
> >
> >Shane
> >(return to lurk mode)
> >
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:32:33 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:01:42 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>Stop playing semantics jedi.
> >> >>
> >> >>Next you'll be asking "and what IS Linux anyway?"
> >> >
> >> > When addressing "who" is "trying" what it is rather relevant.
> >> >
> >> > Just who do you percieve trying to represent Linux as being
> >> > able to go toe to toe with a Starfire or VAX cluster?
> >>
> >> Stop changing the subject jedi.
> >> I made no mention of Starfire or Vax cluster.
> >> Desktop jedi. Desktop...
> >>
> >> > You are merely presenting a false opponent that you can more
> >> > easily knock down rather than addressing how Linux has already
> >> > been used in mission critical areas.
> >>
> >> Desktop Linux jedi. Stop changing the subject toward server systems. I
> >> made no mention of that.
> >>
> >> >>The kernel?
> >> >>The distro?
> >> >>
> >> >>etc
> >> >>
> >> >>You remind me of Otter in Animal House where he is in the student
> >> >>court defending Delta house against the jock fraternity.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>claire
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:48:31 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:33:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>>>You mean like Linux is trying to do?
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> What Linux?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Linux Inc?
> >> >>> Linux Corp?
> >> >>> Linux Unlimited?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> HA is a niche even amongst the larger server market. Otherwise,
> >> >>> NT would never have been able to go anywhere and DEC would never
> >> >>> have been bought out by the likes of Compaq.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>claire
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 19:51:20 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
> >> >>>>wrote:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 19:42:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>>>>>Here is the part of the article I like best:
> >>
>>>>>>>********************************************************************************
> >> >>>>>>Meanwhile, Linux backer Compaq Computer is taking the open source
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> ...not exactly what I think of when enterprise computing comes
> >> >>>>> to mind. Although, not being suited for the glass room hardly
> >> >>>>> keeps other OSes from decending upon the land like a plague of
> >> >>>>> locusts.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>[deletia]
> >> >>>>
> >> >>
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
